Comparison of BMSs with SES for Symptomatic Intracranial Disease of the Middle Cerebral Artery Stenosis
Xuanye Yue,Qin Yin,Gangming Xi,Wusheng Zhu,Gelin Xu,Renliang Zhang,Zhiming Zhou,Minmin Ma,Guangfu Jin,Xinfeng Liu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-010-9885-z
2010-01-01
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
Abstract:This study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic middle cerebral artery stenosis treated with balloon-mounted stents (BMS) and self-expandable Wingspan system (SES). We reviewed the 69 consecutive stent placement procedures for symptomatic atherosclerotic stenosis (≥70) in M1 segment of middle cerebral artery in 67 patients in 3 years. According to the stent types, the patients were classed as BMS and SES groups. The demographic characteristics, conventional risk factors of ischemic stroke, degree of stenosis, periprocedural complications, stent types, and clinical and angiographic outcomes were analyzed. There were 39 patients in the BMS group and 28 patients in the SES group. The demographic characteristics, conventional risk factors, and periprocedural complications were similar but different in residual stenosis after stenting in both groups (5.9% ± 9.9% vs. 14.4% ± 14.6%; P = 0.01). For the overall cohort, the rate of stroke or death and restenosis was 10.9% (7/66) and 24.5% (14/57), respectively. The frequency of restenosis was higher in the SES group than in the BMS group (log-rank, P = 0.04; crude hazard ratio = 3.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01–9.15; P = 0.049; and adjusted hazard ratio = 3.61; 95% CI, 1.06–12.27; P = 0.04); however, there was no difference in clinical outcomes (log-rank, P = 0.51; crude hazard ratio = 1.66; 95% CI, 0.36–7.61; P = 0.51; and adjusted hazard ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.04–7.89; P = 0.69). The corrected degree of restenosis was higher in the SES than the BMS group. The prevalence of restenosis was higher in the SES than the BMS group, but the perioperative complications and follow-up clinical outcomes had no significant difference.